Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canada's 9-11
Envoy Encore ^ | June 21, 2003 | Pete Vere

Posted on 06/21/2003 8:56:10 AM PDT by Theosis

I was two-hundred miles from New York City when the terrorists struck the World Trade Center. I never thought I would live throught another event that would so affect the psyche of a nation. And yet, for our American readership, this is exactly what has happened this week as Canada legalizes homosexual marriages.

I spent a good part of the evening talking to various friends from back home – friends from among the Church hierarchy as well as those within the Catholic apologetics and pro-life community. The legalization of so-called homosexual marriages is the only topic on our mind right now. For those who keep tabs on such things, you have probably noticed the personality change among all the Canadians who hang around Envoy Encore. As the shock sets in, we've transformed from our usual laid-back and fun-loving selves into a group of angry and bitter people.

Thus calling this Canada’s Moral September 11th is not melodramatic on my part. I cannot begin to explain the effect this is having on our national psyche. Unlike America which is still fighting the culture war, Canada has now crossed the Tiber back into pagan lands.

(Excerpt) Read more at envoymagazine.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Business/Economy; Canada; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: activism; america; canada; culturewars; democracy; downourthroats; gay; homosexual; homosexualagenda; itaintmarriage; judicial; marriage; moralseptember11th; samesexmarriage; unitedstates
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-123 next last
Folks, this is just across the border!
1 posted on 06/21/2003 8:56:10 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Polycarp; Sursum Corda; NYer; sandyeggo; Loyalist; american colleen
ping!
2 posted on 06/21/2003 9:00:02 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Perhaps this is Canada's version of homeland defense. Now all the Muslims will go back home.
3 posted on 06/21/2003 9:11:59 AM PDT by AZLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Comparing gay marriages to 9-11? Yeah, not melodramatic at all. *roll eyes*
4 posted on 06/21/2003 9:20:02 AM PDT by Lunatic Fringe (Tip the Pizza guy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Definitely a nasty day in Canadian history, but to compare it with the killing of thousands of people is a bit insane.
5 posted on 06/21/2003 9:23:26 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
How long before it is a "hate crime" for a church to refuse to "marry" a same-sex "couple?" Whereas before I'm sure some very liberal "churches" had "wedding ceremonies" for same-sex "couples," there were more conservative churches that only recognized traditional marriage. So you were free to go to a liberal church or a more traditional church, depending on your beliefs about a number of things.

You know it won't be good enough for the homosexists to have their liberal churches and to let the conservative churches alone. No, they will use the force of government to make traditional churches accept homosexual "marriage" or disband. There will not be the SLIGHTEST toleration towards anyone who doesn't follow the official dogma -- all in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity." Also, it is interesting how the left for years used to go on about how "useless" and "worthless" marriage was. Their ideal was brief, undemanding relationships and they ridiculed love and commitment. In the past five years marriage has gone from being an anachronism to being the most important thing in the world to the left (as long as it's "gay" marriage).

6 posted on 06/21/2003 9:26:47 AM PDT by Wilhelm Tell (Lurking since 1997!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
The presentation was a little over the top but I think the author's premise is basically sound: On 9-11 America was attacked by external enemies, while with this gay "marriage" ruling and other things Canada is being attacked by internal enemies. I can understand the author's anguish at seeing a decent country self-destruct really over nothing (I mean "nothing" in the sense that things that any sane person should scoff at and dismiss are becomming the centerpiece of an increasingly arbitrary and unjust system of law).
7 posted on 06/21/2003 9:39:50 AM PDT by Wilhelm Tell (Lurking since 1997!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
My advice to the American people? This has taken place not in the distant future, but just across your northern border by a group of people who for the most part look and sound like Americans. So begin lobbying your elected officials now for a constitutional ammendment to protect the common definition of marriage.

Not a bad idea at all.

8 posted on 06/21/2003 9:41:41 AM PDT by irgbar-man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty
Perhaps this is Canada's version of homeland defense. Now all the Muslims will go back home.

Multiculturalism and liberal tolerance are about to have their first major head-on clash in Canada, and it will be ugly.

Some of the so-called Christian churches will roll over for the state on this issue, but I have no illusions about our growing populations of Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus accepting homosexual 'marriage'.

9 posted on 06/21/2003 9:42:28 AM PDT by Loyalist (Keeper of the Schismatic Orc Ping List. Freepmail me if you want on or off it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Marriage, as we understand it is a custom and a social institution, has evolved over millenia, along with accompanying customs on child raising, parental rights and duties, and property.

Heretofore, marriage of a man and a woman has been perhaps the most universally recognized and portable social convention (see e.g. http://www.dfat.gov.au/travel/marriage_os.html).

But this will pose an exception to that, as the Australian Government has in their law (the Hague Convention on Marriage is silent AFAIK on same-sex marriages).

And it sets a ludicrous precedent. What'll be next? Someone decides they want to marry their dog? Gimme a break.

10 posted on 06/21/2003 9:45:10 AM PDT by pttttt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Canada has now crossed the Tiber back into pagan lands

But note:
The Province of Alberta is fighting back, from what I hear in radio reports.
As I understand, the provincial government of Alberta has said they will do some sort
of "opt-out" of the gay-marriage situation.

As a US citizen, I don't know if this will actually work, but at least the
folks in Alberta putting up a fight.
11 posted on 06/21/2003 9:50:26 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; BlindedByTruth
What's this world comming too. Ping
12 posted on 06/21/2003 9:58:09 AM PDT by JonathansMommie (How are inlaws different from out laws? Out laws Are wanted!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
I was two-hundred miles from New York City when the terrorists struck the World Trade Center. I never thought I would live throught another event that would so affect the psyche of a nation

Equating the shock of homosexual marriage in Canada to the World Trade Center attacks in America is revolting.  Thousands of people died in New York, remember?  Pious outgassing unable to distinguish a difference between how other people wish to live their lives and  innocents being  blown to bits in the marketplace is Islamic to the core.  The Taliban are here, and they are no longer Arabic.
13 posted on 06/21/2003 10:21:19 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Equating the shock of homosexual marriage in Canada to the World Trade Center attacks in America is revolting. Thousands of people died in New York, remember?

Not necessarily. Despite the loss of life, America emerged from 9-11 much stronger as a democracy. On the other hand, the legalization of homosexual marriages in Canada emerged from the court-system, in opposition to the will of most Canadians. Basically, Canada is now governed by an unelected judiciary.
14 posted on 06/21/2003 10:27:13 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: VOA
As a US citizen, I don't know if this will actually work, but at least the folks in Alberta putting up a fight.

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT

Our Priemer, Ralph Klien says that it will Not happen in Alberta. And he has a huge majority of the populace behind him. Tell me, are there not a large number of States in the US that have legalized same sex marriages.?

15 posted on 06/21/2003 10:28:00 AM PDT by biffalobull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: VOA
Well, easy enough. Have Alberta submit an (US) application for statehood.
16 posted on 06/21/2003 10:30:35 AM PDT by dufekin (Peace HAS COME AT LONG LAST to the tortured people of Iraq!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
I feel sorry for you. If your life is so disrupted by how other adults choose to live theirs, that you equate the shock you feel to the deaths of thousands, your need to control others is a pathology. You have my sympathies.
17 posted on 06/21/2003 10:32:26 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
As a New Yorker, I'm incredibly insulted by the premise of this column. 3, 000 innocent men women and children incinerated = consenting adults who love each other being allowed to marry?
I don't think so. Attempting to equate them is disgusting.

Anway, I don't see what gets people so upset by the concept of gay marriage. They're consenting adults, they're not hurting anyone... why the moral outrage to the point that someone would even think of equating it with 9/11? Maybe I'm the minority here, but I believe a certain percentage of people are born destined to be homosexual. It's been that way through the ages. I don't see the point in denying death benefits, right of hospital visitation, etc. to the person they have chosen to spend their life with. It doesn't bother me in the least. I think there are much larger things to worry about in this world.

When I was growing up, in a nice Ozzie and Harriet suburban community, a gay man lived in the house next door, all through my childhood. He was a very nice neighbor and always kind to me (I'm female, in case anyone should jump to a wrong conclusion.) I always knew he was gay, so maybe knowing a gay person firsthand from the time I was very wrong has kept me from developing prejudices. I'm thankful for it.
18 posted on 06/21/2003 10:39:59 AM PDT by saquin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
The taliban are the homosexuals. The taliban are the regressive liberals who impose their brand of thought crime.

The CBC and others may cover what the man on the street in saying. (and we do mean saying) The public is disgusted and outraged over this homosexual marriage deviance. Cretian is a fool and has done this to make his own anticoncervative mark. I have not spoken to one, not one, canadian who approves of this. It is NOT just the devout religioius people who object. Its Joe average canadian who objects.

Moslems would support this since now they can easily push to have their polygamist marragages recognized. If you allow one you SHALL allow the other.

Only homosexuals would not understand, just like the al-queda did not understand the US reaction to the bombings. Just like the terrorist did not understand what would happen in afganistan or Iraq. Homosexuals don't get it because they are not parents raising children. They do not have a generational contitnuation. For them its only about sex.
19 posted on 06/21/2003 10:40:20 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: biffalobull
Tell me, are there not a large number of States in the US that have legalized same sex marriages.?

I'm not an expert on the topic...but I think only the state of Vermont has
passed anything resembling anything close to real "same-sex marraige".
IIRC, most of these ceremonies are performed for couples from states other than VT.

I think (and am fully open to correction), but the "gay weddings" you see,
especially the mass ceremonies in places like San Francisco are just
"show" marriages, not recognized legally.

Amazing as it will seem, California passed a "protection of marriage"
(as in only for man-woman union) a few years ago by state referendum.
I think it passed with something like 65-70% of the vote.

I suspect this didn't get that much national press coverage, nor a court
invalidation...the gay-agenda parts of the national media doesn't want the
rest of the USA (or the world for that matter) to know that the concept of gay marriage
doesn't even fly with 50% of Californians.

I give the gay Nazis credit. Just like Adolph and his buddies, they know how
to hang on and bid their time on their way to seizing power over matrimony.
20 posted on 06/21/2003 10:40:42 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe

Well, to completely go into the lunatic fringe, think how many more "couples" will share between themselves that marital asset called aids. This alone will probably cause more deaths than 9/11 far and away.


21 posted on 06/21/2003 10:41:42 AM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dufekin
Have Alberta submit an (US) application for statehood.

I'll never forget the mayor of Calgary talking up his city (IIRC, during their
hosting of the Winter Olympics).

He said something like "if you look at the skyline of Calgary, you probably would
think you're looking at Dallas!"

I have relatives in Edmondton/Sherwood Park. They are proudly Canadians. While sympathetic
to US interests/intentions, they would probably need a few more pushes by the
real loonies in Ottowa/Quebec before they'd ask to be the 51st star.

But my gut tells me that long-shot is not a total impossibility.
22 posted on 06/21/2003 10:44:25 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
If your life is so disrupted by how other adults choose to live theirs, that you equate the shock you feel to the deaths of thousands, your need to control others is a pathology. You have my sympathies.

This isn't about how others live their lives, but rather about a tiny minority circumventing the democratic process and forcing an entire nation to redefine what is probably the oldest and most universally recognized social convention in human history. I believe we call this pathology narcissism.
23 posted on 06/21/2003 10:45:22 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Malsua
Uhm, if you are married and have syphilis, then only you and your wife will have it.

If you cannot get married and have syphilis, you polygamous love life will spread syphilis far and wide.

See why marriage might be better?
24 posted on 06/21/2003 10:46:20 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Forcing a redefinition is nowhere similar to killing one single person, let alone thousands.
25 posted on 06/21/2003 10:47:46 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Malsua
You do realize AIDS is not a "gay disease", don't you? There are more heterosexuals with AIDS in the world than homosexuals. Just because SARS first spread in Asia doesn't make it an "Asian disease". It can affect anyone. Just because AIDS first spread among the gay community (and stayed mainly within that community in the beginning because it is only contracted through close, physical contact rather than through the air, like influenza) doesn't make it an exclusively, or even predominately anymore, "gay disease".

And I fail to see how gay marriage would somehow spread AIDS and cause more deaths.
26 posted on 06/21/2003 10:49:45 AM PDT by saquin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Uhm, if you are married and have syphilis, then only you and your wife will have it.

If you cannot get married and have syphilis, you polygamous love life will spread syphilis far and wide.

See why marriage might be better?

"Married" homosexual couples, for the most part, still scoff at monogamy. I have seen this countless times in their own writings. Sorry, but that point is moot.

27 posted on 06/21/2003 10:56:22 AM PDT by AnnaZ (unspunwithannaz.blogspot.com... "It is UNSPUN and it is Unspun, but it is not unspun." -- unspun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: saquin


>>You do realize AIDS is not a "gay disease", don't you? <<

In the USA it is. 70%+ of Aids infected people in the USA are gay males. Act-up and the the rainbow coalition don't want you to know that.


28 posted on 06/21/2003 10:57:05 AM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Malsua
70% seems kind of high. The disease is becoming more and more heterosexual every year, But even if the 70% number is correct, so what?
In Africa, the overwhelming majority of cases are heterosexual. In the USA most cases are among gays. It depends on which category of people had the disease first in that country. It is a difficult disease to spread since it depends on the exchange of body fluids, therefore it is only logical that it would remain mainly among people of the same sexual orientation.

I still fail to see the logic of marriage causing MORE deaths from AIDS.
29 posted on 06/21/2003 11:02:46 AM PDT by saquin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ
Then you agree that marriage will make it worse? I'd really like to understand that.
30 posted on 06/21/2003 11:03:41 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Canada is going to split into two countries in the very near future. Nothing is going to be able to stop it now. The good people are going to merely gather in one section of the country and announce they've had it with the immoral, decadent section of the country that will not fight for what is right, allow gay marriage, and legalize dope.
31 posted on 06/21/2003 11:11:25 AM PDT by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Forcing a redefinition is nowhere similar to killing one single person, let alone thousands.

Then why did America bother going to war in Afganistan or Iraq? Given America's current technological capabilities and her ability to keep these folks out of the country in the future, why risk more American lives and those of Afgani and Iraqi civillians? Are freedom and democracy worth the cost of human life?

Basically, as much as you are trying to reduce this to simply a consenting relationship between two adults, this isn't the issue. Otherwise, homosexuals would simply engage in these types of relationships without insisting that it be called marriage? Why not call it something else like they do in Vermont? Thus what is at issue here, and what you don't seem to want to address, is a historical and universal convention supported by the majority of a nation's citizens being overturned by judicial fiat through the political maneuvering of a tiny minority of activists intended to circumvent the democratic process. Nations survive the death of individuals, no matter how great the tragedy; however, they seldom survive the betrayal from within of their system of government without great loss of life.
32 posted on 06/21/2003 11:14:28 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999
Canada is going to split into two countries in the very near future.

Care to put a date on that?  The next election will go Liberal,
the Alliance will pick up a few seats but nothing like a majority.
Canadians are  ruly, benevolent consumers of bureaucracy.
I predict....nothing will happen.
33 posted on 06/21/2003 11:14:31 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
No, what's at issue here is the social conservative's alarm at the failure of state power to dictate the private lives of consenting adults. Raising the clamor to the level of national disaster just indicates how embedded the desire to control others is in 'freedom' loving conservatism.
34 posted on 06/21/2003 11:17:45 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Then you agree that marriage will make it worse? I'd really like to understand that.
/////////
sophistry.
35 posted on 06/21/2003 11:23:54 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Then you agree that marriage will make it worse? I'd really like to understand that.
 
I haven't commented on the "marriage" issue per se, just on the possibility of responsible behavior as a "benefit" of it. I do not believe that extending the now "idea" of "marriage" to homosexuals will change the destructive nature of the lifestyle, and this not by my own perhaps prejudicial presumptions, but by paying attention to their own words.

36 posted on 06/21/2003 11:26:04 AM PDT by AnnaZ (unspunwithannaz.blogspot.com... "It is UNSPUN and it is Unspun, but it is not unspun." -- unspun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: saquin
Big difference between your silent neigbor and the GLSEN's who are activly demanding children experiment with homosexual behavior. People have every right to see homsexual marriages as an attempt to directly attack their families and attack their children.

They are not equating the deaths, they are equating the shock value. Until you live in the enironment where this ill fringe group has unraveled your home with their in your face efforts, you have no monopoly on defending you home and children from threats foreign and domestic.

The canadian federation almost fell apart once before during our lifetimes. There is no reason to not believe this could be another push. (some french canadians can use this as their opportunity to fianally get what they want) Alberta has already signalled they will opt out of the homosexual marrage requirement. Canada has her own demons to fight, unfortunatly her demons are internal.
37 posted on 06/21/2003 11:26:28 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: VOA; dufekin
http://www.unitednorthamerica.org
38 posted on 06/21/2003 11:29:16 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Great line:

The answer lay in our beloved Maple Leaf, which now symbolizes Canada's
role as the red light district of the global village.

39 posted on 06/21/2003 11:29:43 AM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ
Okay. I'll file it under 'anecdotal.'
40 posted on 06/21/2003 11:31:44 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
"Canadians are ruly, benevolent consumers of bureaucracy. I predict....nothing will happen."

I remember my view of Americans on September 10th, 2001. I found them a warm, hospitable and friendly people, however, when it came to foreign policy they feared bloodshed and had to be dragged kicking and screaming into any global conflict. Thus their response to attacks against their interest abroad was generally to pack-up and go away. No wonder Osama bin Looney thought nothing would happen as a result of 9-11.
41 posted on 06/21/2003 11:39:07 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: VOA; biffalobull
I do have knowledge and ONLY vermont has created a VERMONT ONLY fiction of domestic partners. It is NOT recognized by any other states. Specifically Connecticut and Georgia have refused to recognize it in their courts. The homosexuals tried to use the "full faith and credit" clause to FORCE other states to recognize homosexual "relations" as normal.

In summary there are NO states which recognize homosexual marriage. There are a MAJORITY of states which specificall define marriage as ONE man and ONE woman. There is a pending constitutional ammendment which will FEDERALIZE the definition.

Massachusets supreme court is trying to legalize homosexual marriage by REMOVING children from the institution of marriage. Thus marriage would be for sex and companionship not protecting children. IRONICALLY the Massachusettes legislature is going to pass a Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA: a law which establishes marrige is ONE man and ONE woman) this would trump the generally leftist wacko massachusetts supreme court. (and they wonder why judges are ridiculed and held is such disregard)

The homosexual nazi's are using one of hitler's methods. Repeat a lie and they will eventually believe it. Hold enough fake marriages and the ignorant will eventually believe them.
42 posted on 06/21/2003 11:39:56 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
As I see it, marriage has two forms; religious union and right of particular contract.

Religious denominations should be left to condone what marriages they will.

Marriage is otherwise a contract that must be sanctioned by the state. Maybe the best solution for all is to get government out of the picture to allow for more private contract.

43 posted on 06/21/2003 11:41:45 AM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
In Canada, there are large blocks of voters who don't inform themselves one tiny bit about any issue. They just line up and vote the way they always voted, the way their parents voted before them etc. etc.

This, and other things happening up here have tossed a bucket of cold water those voters and woken them up to the fact that not only are the traditional parites committed to destroying society as we know it, but that self rule in Canada is largly an illusion. I think that change is in the air.
44 posted on 06/21/2003 11:42:06 AM PDT by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saquin
You are right AIDS is not a "gay" disease. The fact that 94% (per CDC) of all new cases are in homoseuxals makes it a predominantly homosexual disease. WHATEVER the reason, the VAST MAJORITY of cases have fallen into the homosexual population. Per the CDC, AIDS has only grown within those having contact with homosexual sex. (partners, needlsharinging with homosexuals,needlesharing, etc)
45 posted on 06/21/2003 11:47:48 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Canada's Gay Muslims Unite
46 posted on 06/21/2003 11:50:10 AM PDT by weegee (NO BLOOD FOR RATINGS: CNN let human beings be tortured and killed to keep their Baghdad bureau open)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; RobbyS; american colleen; el_chupacabra; sinkspur; Lady In Blue; Polycarp; narses; ...
BIG PING!
47 posted on 06/21/2003 11:52:35 AM PDT by Theosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: saquin
94% of all new AIDS cases are in the homosexual population. The 70% number is actually low, it should be higher.

(it has become harder to coalate numbers because the cause of death is not listed on all state death certificates in order to be able to "hide" those that died from aids or aids related diseases.)

48 posted on 06/21/2003 11:52:36 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Grig
The public didn't even get to vote on this issue.
49 posted on 06/21/2003 11:53:02 AM PDT by weegee (NO BLOOD FOR RATINGS: CNN let human beings be tortured and killed to keep their Baghdad bureau open)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Theosis
Once again, you grossly overestimate the effect of the marriage ruling on the country. Not everyone has your beliefs.
50 posted on 06/21/2003 11:55:28 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-123 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson